(Post a new comment)

	hieronymousb 2006-03-23 01:28 pm UTC (link)
	Is this the wanky portion you were referring to? If so, I suggest linking to that part in your post (just to help us lazy people out). It took me a bit to find any wanking in the thread itself aside from one playful faux wank. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	sheep 2006-03-23 02:16 pm UTC (link)
	http://www.journalfen.net/community/wank_report/295.html?thread=424999#t424999 Wank report is slightly amusing, too. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	felinephoenix 2006-03-23 02:51 pm UTC (link)
	Actually, I found the people involved ranting about Glossing's evilness yet refusing to explain just why she was so EVOL ZOMG pretty wanky. So, I pretty much found this all a little wanky. But maybe that's just me. ...Towel, anyone? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

hieronymousb
2006-03-23 03:10 pm UTC (link)

Yes, this is quite possibly the most confusing wank I've ever seen, but after reading all the links, I think I get it. Let's see if I have this right...

1] glossing was friends with some people and they formed a little clique of fic-reccing, fic-writing, RPing--general fannish stuff.

2] glossing kicked out one of those people (or something?) and told lies about her, then badmouthed (told lies?) about other people via AIM/filtered posts (meaning we can, alas, never see most of this wanktastic stuff)

3] People believed glossing and ended their friendships with others, or at least started amassing grudges (cue my lack of sympathy for the Nice People due to this one; really, who just believes someone without getting all sides?)

4] Friendships were re-forged, thus people turned on glossing for being a lying, manipulative bitch.

5] Wanks explode everywhere, including on third-party journals. glossing plays the sympathy card. People accuse glossing of not letting shit go. People don't let shit go. More wankity wank. Lots of long ranty posts appear which get much admiration and *hugs* from various people, but which omit many details under the category of being "personal".

6] If you say you're neutral or criticize anyone for seemingly being rude to glossing, then OMFG you don't know WTF you're talking about (asshole!!1111) and are told to STFU.

Then comes F_W and wank_report and wankitywank and HOLY HELL what a beast!

I'm inclined to say that no one involved is looking very good by now, but I have a feeling I'll just be told that I don't know what in the hell I'm talking about since I haven't seen everything. Well, I haven't, so my opinion is completely that of an outsider's.

If what this glossing woman has done is as bad as everyone says, then I don't think anyone in their right mind would agree with her actions, but at the same time, who takes everything at face value and just believes it so easily when one of their friends bashes another friend? If one of my friends came up to me right now and said I ought to de-friend another friend due to them being, oh, a serial rapist or something, I don't think I'd just cut off contact with that person without talking it out. From what I've read, it sounds as though people just bought into whatever glossing said. Can anyone involved explain that little detail to me or what? Why was glossing so easily believed to the point of near-shattered friendships? Or is this also too personal to be disclosed?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	sheep 2006-03-23 03:42 pm UTC (link)
	You know the wank is bad when the summary looks like a tl:dr :D But thanks for that, it's making more sense now... kinda. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	hieronymousb 2006-03-23 03:55 pm UTC (link)
	You know the wank is bad when the summary looks like a tl:dr :D I guess a two-year long wank can do that? I don't know, having never seen one before this. (Reply to this)(Parent)

ingrid
2006-03-23 03:48 pm UTC (link)

have a feeling I'll just be told that I don't know what in the hell I'm talking about since I haven't seen everything.

And you never will. Which is what makes everyone look completely vicious and wonkers, not just Glossing the Maleficent.

In my completely indifferent opinion, this seems like a bored sociopath targeted a batch of naive 'netflowers who are still frothing with rage that they'd been had by a gigantic wanker, who wouldn't have gotten them if they had the incredulity God gave a lima bean.

Eventually, they grew some spines, she likes to poke them for fun when there's nothing good on TV, there's much random gnashing and biting all over the place and it either bores or confuses anyone who comes in contact with it.

I'm still of the mind they should publish and be damned, everything they have on her and be done with, but I'm pretty sure that will never happen. Not this year, anyway.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

hieronymousb
2006-03-23 04:05 pm UTC (link)

I more or less agree with you.

I think much of this bitterness on their parts stems from guilt over what they did to their friends (thanks to their lack of incredulity) as well as resentment over getting misled in the first place. While it's admirable that they eventually realized the error of their ways and fixed their friendships, I don't understand why everything keeps being hidden by the personal banner.

There are some kinds of personal information which I understand not wanting to post about, but if Glossing was just lying, then what could a full disclosure do except make her look like shit?